TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (7) TMI 368
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as income from business or income from house property. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) held that is an income from house property. 3. The ld. AR submits that the present issue is covered by the order dated 12.01.2018 in assessee's own case for Assessment Year 2011-12 and referred to Para No.7 of the said order. The ld. DR submits that the assessee changed its stand what was initially submitted before Assessing Officer and referred to Para No.4.3 of CIT(A). The ld. AR submits that the Revenue did not prefer any appeal against the order dated 12.01.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12 passed by this Tribunal. After hearing both the parties, we find that the issue is covered by the order of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal wherein the Coor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rani, Kolkata-700 001. The assessee was given right to, "assigned, sub-let. under-let or part with any possession of the room or any part ,of room or permit any person to occupy even in case of temporary absence of assessee". By virtue of this agreement assessee collected licence fees and other charges from sub-tenants and the Revenue all along has accepted the income declared by the assessee under the head "profits and gains of business or profession". Ld. counsel before us argued on the concept of consistency on the given facts of the case. In this case also the terms of the lease of business assets, the intention of the lessor is that the asset leased out must remain and be treated as commercial asset and there is an exploitation of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ltd.(Supra) In this view of the matter, it is clear that what is to be really seen is whether the property is exploited by way of complex commercial activity or not. In this backdrop, it is quite' appropriate to refer to the observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the landmark judgment of Radhasoamy Satsang (supra), referring to the case law of Hoystead V Commissioner of Taxation [1926] AC 155 (PC), wherein if is observed as under :- Parties are not permitted to begin fresh litigations because of new views they may entertain of the law of the case, or new versions which they present as to what Should be a proper apprehension by the court of the legal result either of the Construction of the documents or the weight....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....does not apply la income tax proceedings and each assessment year being a unit, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year but where a fundamental aspect permeating through the different assessment years has been found as a fact one way or the other and parties have all owe d that position to' be sustained by not challenging the order, it would not be at all appropriate to allow the position to be changed in a subsequent year". This principle has been upheld and re-stated by Hon'ble Supreme Court recently in the case of PFH Mall & Retail Mangt. P. Ltd. dated 04.09.2012, wherein reiterated the Rule of Consistency and applied the same on the very issue, that is whether the income in question is to be trea....